Rigor Mortis wrote: »
The Rugby Paper (not the best source) are reporting that World Rugby will discuss reducing the number of subs in the new year. An attempt to make teams have more players who can last 80, thus fitter smaller players. Smaller players leading to less serious collisions.
This is something Keith Wood has called for for a long while.
_Tyrrell_ wrote: »
Don't really see how this will work.
You're either going to lose one of the front row replacements, which means having a prop try to cover both sides from the bench as you'll need a replacement hooker.
Possibly drop 19/20 in place of a player to cover 2nd row and back row, but one player covering 5 players who potentially could end up injured is never going to work out well.
So realistically you're looking at removing one of the 21/22/23. Which doesn't really match up with the directive of making players last 80 minutes and trying to downsize players as backs are generally (aside from the Islanders) still quite small.
Interested Observer wrote: »
Or else like football you can still have 8 subs but you can only use 6.
Ciaran-Irl wrote: »
Yeah, that's the answer I'd say. You can have x number on the bench but you can only make y number of subs. You could up the number on the bench to 10 if you wanted, but stipulate max 4 or 5 changes.
Tigerandahalf wrote: »
That just wouldn't make sense. Does a coach then hold off making changes in case one of his players gets injured.
It would be farcical if all the subs had been used and then a prop got injured and couldn't be replaced.
It would be going back to the bad old amature days where an injured player couldn't be replaced.
I wonder what is the thinking behind it?
Jump_In_Jack wrote: »
It might be an idea to have two props on the bench as injury cover only,
And four other subs:
One sub that could cover hooker and openside flanker, (perhaps also blindside flanker)
One sub that could cover lock, (perhaps blindside flanker) and No. 8,
One sub to cover 9, 10 and 15,
And one sub to cover 11 to 14.
That's' 6 subs in total, and it would deter teams from making subs as tactical boosts, instead the emphasis would be injury cover subs.
It might even develop a new breed of specialist subs, utility players that would be more valuable for their ability to cover multiple positions.